Research Design: Qualitative, Constructivism and Case Study

3.2.1. Research approach: Qualitative

The study employs a qualitative approach. Qualitative research is broad and encompasses a variety of approaches that are used to collect and analyse data (Maree, 2007; Hesse-Biber, and Leavy, 2010). “It has no theory or paradigm that is distinctively it's own, nor does it have a distinct set of methods or practices that are entirely it's own” Dezin and Lincoln, 2011 cited in (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls and Ormston, 2013: 2). Thus, qualitative research has no clear meaning attached to it and may differ from one research discipline to another (Ritchie et.al., 2013). Flick (2011) describes qualitative as contextual research that is driven by or potentially employs inductive research approaches for the sole basis to acquire information on the broad

36 social context. Whereas Hollard & Campbell (2005: 5) postulates that “qualitative research provides insight into the ‘black box’ of social and economic processes and relations which are poorly understood, ambiguous, or sensitive in nature”. In support of the latter, Holloway &

Wheeler 1996 cited in Maree (2007:4) further asserts that “qualitative research studies people or systems by interacting with and observing the participants in their natural environment and focusing in their meanings and interpretations”. The latter definitions are consolidated into one in Creswell’s definition of what constitutes qualitative research:

“Qualitative research begins with assumptions, a worldview, the possible use of a theoretical lens, and the study of research problems inquiring in the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. To study this problem, the qualitative researcher uses an emerging qualitative approach to inquiry the collection of data in a natural setting sensitive to the people and places under study and data analysis that is inductive and establishes patterns or themes. The final written report or presentation included voices of participants, the reflexivity of the researcher, and complex description and interpretation of the problem, and it extends the literature and signals a call for action” (Creswell, 2007:

37).

The above definitions convey and emphasize the constantly changing nature of the qualitative inquiry, from philosophical perspectives to social constructs or worldviews, through the theoretical lens that forms the basis of understating, and on to the processes involved in investigating and interpreting social realities or issues (Creswell, 2007). In addition, there is also some shared consensus about this notion amongst scholars (Creswell, 2007; Flick, 2011;

Hollard & Campbell, 2005; Maree, 2007) pertaining to learning about various processes and socio-cultural contexts that motivate several behavioral patterns within society and to establish their construct meanings.

Thus, in contrast to focusing on data that is rigorously measured and scrutinized as in quantitative research. Qualitative research is more concerned with understanding social reality and extracting meaning from data, whilst also providing emphasis on the quality and depth of information. Moreover, it intends to explore questions such as ‘what’, ‘why’, or ‘how’ in research. It addresses social realities pertaining to certain experiences, interests and broader societal insights of a given issue (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010; Holliday, 2002). Therefore, this research approach intends to capture judgments, perceptions, and meanings of unmeasurable cause-and-effect processes regarding rapid housing development through the self-built model in peri-urban areas.

37 3.2.2. Philosophical paradigmatic perspective: Constructivism

Qualitative research is held together by general philosophical assumptions or worldviews that attempt to understand or explain social and human issues. Positivism, critical theory, pragmatism, and constructivism are some of the frameworks that form the theoretical basis of understanding the human subject and researcher’s position in qualitative research (Creswell, 2007; Patton, 1990 Walliman, 2017). For the purpose of this study, a constructivist view of the research problem has been employed. Phrases such as interpretivism, relativism, and idealism have been some of the terms combined with or used to label the constructivism paradigm. This paradigm has no rigid meaning as it is often understood in the form of multiple social contexts.

According to Mackenzie and Knipe (2006) constructivism attempts to make sense of the realm of social experiences in their natural setting. Thus, it suggests that reality is socially constructed and experientially based (Dezin &Lincoln, 2008; Guda & Lincoln, 1994). In an attempt to give a somewhat clear meaning of what constitutes the theoretical underpinnings of this paradigm Walliman asserts that:

“The constructivist paradigm maintains that the view of the world we see around us is the creation of the mind. This does not mean that the world is not real, but rather that we can only experience it personally through our perceptions which are influenced by our preconceptions, beliefs, and values; as we are not neutral, disembodied observers but part of the society” (Walliman, 2017: 22).

Sarantakos (2005) further supports the latter definition by stating that construct meaning is not fixed or uniform, and can only develop out of peoples connection with the world. It does not exist until the mind connects with it. Subsequently, what people often consider to be ‘reality’

is not in the actual sense. However, what is often constructed through people’s personal experiences, culturally defined and historically found interpretations are all perceived as

‘reality’ (Sarantakos, 2005; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2010). Interaction amongst people forms a significant and distinct feature of social life in which subjective meanings derive. Thus, constructivists often focus on certain contexts in which individuals live and work for the purpose of understanding or interpreting the historical, cultural or institutional setting of the people being studied (Creswell, 2007; McNeill & Chapman, 2005). Moreover, constructivist researchers acknowledge that their interpretation of the world or social issue is formed through their background, and they also recognize how their own understanding or perceptions in the study are embedded in their personal, cultural, and historical experiences (Creswell, 2007). In other words, historical, cultural, institutional, and interactional norms and eventualities inevitably condition each act of ‘seeing’ and ‘saying’ in people’s lives (Holliday, 2002).

38 The philosophical descriptions presented above of the constructivist paradigm emphasize the inextricable connection of the researcher and the human subjects or case being investigated.

Contrary to quantitative research, the researcher cannot be a neutral observer but needs to part and parcel of the research process. This creates an approach that is largely subjective and inductive in nature, particularly pertaining to creating meaning and value from the data collected in the field (Creswell, 2003; Walliman, 2017). In addition, it shows that this paradigm does not subscribe to any one reality or basic belief, but rather it acknowledges that there are other social realities or perspectives of the world including the researchers that construct meaning around prevailing social or human issues. As it generally seeks to understand a certain case or issue through ascribed interpretations assigned by people through the broad lenses of constructivist worldviews. Therefore, this paradigm best describes the nature of this study as it relays much on the participant’s experiences and perceptions pertaining to self-building and homeownership in peri-urban areas. It also allows the researcher to observe and understand interactions amongst people, and openly explore the prevailing context of uMzinyathi in relation to the subject matter of the study.

3.2.3. Qualitative approach to inquiry or design: Case Study

The philosophical paradigms or worldviews of qualitative research, through their broad lenses, encompass several approaches of qualitative inquiry or design, namely, case studies, narrative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and participatory action research (Creswell, 2007). It would be ideal to discuss each approach in-depth, however, only one research design is congruent with the chosen philosophical assumptions of constructivism in the context and the overall purpose of this study, of which in this case is the case study design.

Maree defines research design as:

“A plan or strategy which moves from the underlying philosophical assumptions to specifying the selection of respondents that data gathering techniques to be used and the data analysis to be done. The choice of the research design is based on the researcher’s assumptions, research skills, and research practices, and influences and the ways in which she or he collects data” (Maree, 2007: 70).

In consideration of the above definition, research designs (also known as strategies of inquiry) refers to forms of inquiry within the qualitative methods approach that provides detailed and distinct direction for processes or techniques to be used in a specific research design (Patton, 1990). Now bringing it back to the chosen research design, there seems to be no distinct meaning attached to defining a case study as it is understood differently by people. For Creswell (2003) a case study refers to an in-depth investigation of a specific issue through one or more

39 cases within a given setting or context (also known as a bounded system). The researcher investigates these cases through in-depth data collection comprising of numerous tools of information inter alia (interviews, observation, audio-visual, and documents), which are strategically categorised into primary and secondary data sources (Creswell, 2003).

Therefore, case studies are not merely designs of inquiry but are also methodologies used to develop an in-depth analysis of a certain case, event, program, activity, or a process. Cases are often constrained by time and activity, and relevant in-depth information can be collected by the researcher through several data collection techniques overtime (Creswell, 2003; Patton, 1990). In this regard, the study used a descriptive case study research design. This was primarily due to the flexible nature of the design and how well it relates with the chosen sampling, data collection strategies and the over research questions of the study. The descriptive design will assist in understanding and gaining more insight about the dynamics including the complexity pertaining to the emerging trends of self-building formal (high quality) housing but that is recognized as informal within the peri-urban landscapes such as uMzinyathi.

Furthermore, through this design, the study seeks to explain why people are gradually moving into peri-urban areas, and this is expressed in a detailed discussion of major factors that inform this movement. Given the surging trends in housing development through the self-built housing process in peri-urban areas, this design also sought to clarify the motivation for and benefits of self-building in areas like uMzinyathi. In addition, intends to better understand and clarify the degree in which peri-urban dwellers are active participants in the decision-making, and overall housing process pertaining to the planning, design, construction, and general management of their own housing. Lastly, it helps explain the type and degree of security of tenure that peri-urban dwellers possess. Hence, in order to answer the research questions and effectively achieve its objectives, the explanatory research design had to be employed.